Tuesday's primary election will whittle down the number of candidates in a contentious race seats on the Washington City Council.

With the city facing tough choices about growth, budgets and transportation, five candidates are vying for the two available seats, including both incumbents.

To help voters get to know the candidates better, The Spectrum & Daily News asked three questions on key topics ahead of the election.

Below are the responses received from the candidates. They were asked to respond in writing. Their answers have been edited for clarity and length as needed.

For more information on this year’s election, visit www.elections.Utah.gov. Voter identification is required to vote in the primary election.

Who’s on the ballot

Daniel Cluff(Photo: Submitted)

Daniel Cluff

Middle school science teacher.

Doug Dennett(Photo: Submitted)

Doug Dennett

General engineering and general building.

Kurt Ivie(Photo: Submitted)

Kurt Ivie

Teacher, coach, contractor and business owner.

Garth Nisson(Photo: Submitted)

Garth Nisson

Former owner and manager of family retail stores.

Douglas Ward(Photo: Submitted)

Douglas Ward

Information systems director for Andrus Transportation.

1. What would be your budget priorities as anticipated population growth and new development increase demands on city services and infrastructure?

Cluff: My budget priorities would focus basically 50/50: 50% would be focusing on current and short term needs of our city, 50% on mid range needs and long term development. I recognize that our city will double in 10 years and we must responsibly invest in our future population, likewise, our city has so many current needs related to maintaining and improving what we already have in place. Compared to a house, we can't build another story on a home that has a foundation that is falling apart.

Dennett: From owning very successful Businesses I know and understand budgets and how to maximize use of money and employees. I believe that there are areas where I can greatly improve things in Washington City and benefit the citizens. Having done hundreds of subdivisions and projects I have tremendous experience in growth and development. I would be able to look at projects as they come before the city and have a background and knowledge of what works and doesn't work. I believe that my knowledge and experience will greatly benefit our City and citizens.

Ivie: Washington City is one of the fastest growing cities in the nation (43,236 by 2030.) Our biggest growth is in single family homes, commercial growth is steady but not near the residential rate, which makes sense due to our climate and recreation. Growth brings economic opportunity that in turn generates the funds needed for future development. The key to preparing for future growth is not to over reach the infrastructure. Developers for the most part, pay for the improvements of their projects. Up-grades to systems in anticipation of growth is the cities responsibility. My priorities are as follows: 1. Roads - Exit 10 congestion that creates safety concerns, delays and impedes commerce. 2. Public Safety. 3. Secondary irrigation water system, to lessen the burden on culinary water, that would not need treatments, making it cheaper to buy and more plentiful to use. 4. Maintenance Utility Systems.

Nisson: The budget priorities that the City has in place are generally part of a strategic plan usually for five years. The priorities have been identified by staff and council and funding for them is usually stretched over a period of years. We as council rely heavily on staff for figures on anticipated growth and recommendations for funding. Personally my priorities are: 1. Public safety; 2. Road construction and repair; 3. Maintenance of the existing facilities , parks , trails, and infrastructure; 4. Address the future with the ability to handle all concerns with growth, the unknowns and unintended consequences that can happen within the community; 5. Having a healthy rainy day fund and a surplus in the general fund.

Ward: I seek to establish a people-first, community-focused Washington City. I believe that our city's priorities are currently out of alignment with that of our citizens. Frustration that exists in the community that our representatives seem far more interested in defending the city instead of strongly advocating for the citizens. I want to hear from our citizens. What do they love about Washington City? What are their concerns and needs? I want to work with them to see a future we will all be proud of. If we plan ahead, growth need not be frightening. Expansion of government is not always the best solution. I would like to see us open to using private contracts and partnerships with other government entities to meet the needs of our citizens & community.

2. What are your thoughts on the proposed construction of a new freeway interchange between mile posts 10-13, and do you support following through with an environmental study through the Utah Department of Transportation?

Cluff: After reading the contract and discussing this topic with key stake holders in the proposed off ramp area, I do not support an interchange down either Main Street or 300 East since it will drastically alter the nature, identity, and quality of life of so many citizens that currently live in those areas. I am hopeful in the promises made by current city officials that the Environmental Study through UDOT will address all of our transportation needs and be open to selecting options that could provide relatively equal value solutions(ex: fixing Exit 10, connecting roads to the back of Green Springs, widening Buena Vista, etc.). I support any study that seeks the best solution and respects existing citizens as much as future citizens.

Dennett: What are your thoughts on the proposed construction of a new freeway interchange between mile posts 10-13, and do you support following through with an environmental study through the Utah Department of Transportation?

Ivie: We all recognize that we have a traffic congestion problem at Exit 10. The city council has engaged in a joint study with UDOT to explore, study and identify all options that are available as improvements to the congestion. This would include but is not limited to the possible widening and reconfiguration of Buena Vista Boulevard, connecting Exit 10 to Exit 13 via Washington Parkway, Northern Corridor completion (that looks very promising,) Main Street connection to Washington Parkway, designated truck routes and any other ideas from citizens that may come forward during the process of the study. This study does not bind us to any future decisions but is required to get funding for any identified proposals. Example - if a viable option is determined we couldn’t get state or federal funds without the study being done. Potentially a future off ramp could be forced upon us without our involvement.

Nisson: A new freeway interchange between I -10 and I- 13 would be in my opinion a terrible idea it would devastate the homeowners that live on Main Street or 300 East and surrounding areas. It would forever more change ,alter, ruin, the complexities of that large part of the City. I could never support this and I do live on South Main Street so I suppose I am biased. I would be for the study if the freeway interchange provision between I-10 and I-13 was removed. Since it wasn't I can't change that now . I do think some other possibilities for traffic solutions should be looked at by professionals we do have and will have traffic nightmares. I think some potential options will be obvious , but I do think some future solutions will come with time.

Ward: We can't ignore the traffic problems in Washington City and the people affected by them. I am against any transportation solutions that would bring devastating harm to our community. I am against the way the proposed freeway interchange has been handled. The best solution will likely not be one large bandage but many intelligently coordinated enhancements. For this reason, I doubt that the environmental study's narrow focus [on a freeway interchange] can give us the solutions we need unless the scope of the study can be amended to accommodate the actual problem. Citizens need to get involved with the issue and stay connected to the process. Attend the public open house August 29. Find out who in your area is on the Environmental Assessment citizen's committee and tell them your concerns and ideas. Watch the web site: mp11.org. Contact heartofwashington@gmail.com. We won't get a second chance at this.

3. What are your goals for developing options for public transportation within the city?

Cluff: For every dollar spent, four dollars is inserted back into the tax base of the system by helping citizens get access to jobs that they could not get to before. Reaching out and partnering with St. George with their current system of transportation makes the most affordable and immediate relief at the moment. Washington City was presented to rough numbers 2 years ago and we were unable to move forward with a transit system since prop 1 did not pass. Year one, our city would have to invest roughly $253,000.00 that would cover costs from new buses to operating expenses, the rest of the costs would be covered under a federal grant. The costs for the following years would be roughly $12,000.00 a month($144,000.00) a year to sustain the system. The busiest stop on the Suntran system is the stop in front of Deseret Industries, the stop closest to Washington City. I think this is the first, most logical, and most affordable step to take towards developing our mass transit system.

Dennett: I would like to hear from the Washington city residents and see what our needs and concerns are and if needed we would come up with ideas and plans that can better serve our community.

Ivie: My goal is to bring a small transit loop as part of a regional system into Washington. Stops would be strategically placed for those that have the need. Additional detailed evaluation is required to determine the realistic potential of sustaining a transit system in the future. I will continue to look for ways to bring this needed service into fruition. Planning now for such an eventuality will increase the likelihood of success. Achieving critical mass to sustain a Washington City bus route is best achieved through the existing SunTran bus system, as an extension of routes into Washington. Transit planning should be done regularly under the auspices of the Metropolitan Planning Organization.

Nisson: Public Transportation for our City has been studied and looked at for years even before I became councilman. I am fundamentally for it and definitely think it will happen. I think all options should be explored to make it happen without putting an unfair burden on our residents. The feasibility of having the service at this time seems to be not having enough funding available and how much participation by our residents could we expect. We also need to work with the other surrounding Cities in creating a master plan for public transportation. Personally I'm all in on public transportation but think it must be implemented very correctly and cautiously. It is definitely part of the future.

Ward: I understand the growing need and would like to reevaluate why the partnership with St. George City’s Sun Trans couldn’t work for the benefit of all. I would love to work towards a better relationship with all our sister cities. I feel confident that a solution exists that doesn’t include Washington going out and purchasing a fleet of old buses. In general, I would seek to improve our working relationship with our citizens, our Chamber of Commerce, our local businesses and our neighboring cities.